This is Steven Salzberg's blog on genomics, pseudoscience, medical breakthroughs, higher education, and other topics, including skepticism about unscientific medical practices. Here's where I can say what I really think about abuses and distortions of science, wherever I see them.

Anti-vaccination propagandists help create the worst whooping cough epidemic in 70 years

The great northwest of the U.S. is known for its natural beauty.It's also a high-tech region with a highly educated public - not exactly the kind of place one would expect to fall for the anti-science rhetoric of the anti-vaccine movement.

But it has. The anti-vaxxers have convinced a frighteningly high number of parents in Washington State to withhold vaccines from their children. A story in The Seattle Times last year reported that

"Washington [state] parents are choosing not to vaccinate their kindergartners at a rate higher than anywhere else in the country."

This despite the fact that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (formed by the founder of Microsoft, which is headquartered in Seattle) is one of the world's leading sponsors of vaccine research.

When the vaccination rates drop, everyone becomes more vulnerable to infectious diseases. When more than 90% of the population is vaccinated, we have "herd immunity" - this means the disease can't spread because there aren't enough susceptible people in the community. So the high rate of vaccine refusal in Washington makes it easier for whooping cough (and other diseases) to spread.

The media has been complicit in spreading some of the anti-vaccine misinformation. Sometimes it comes straight from the media itself, such as the credulous, anti-science, anti-vax CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson. Other times it comes from talk shows, magazines, or even airline advertisements that provide a platform for anti-vax celebrity doctors such as Jay Gordon (who gained fame as Jenny McCarthy's son's doctor) and "Dr. Bob" Sears, who has published his own "alternative" vaccine schedule in a book filled with anti-vaccine nonsense. These characters continue to claim, at every chance they get, that vaccines cause autism (as Gordon has said, repeatedly), or that they cause other harms, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They use their medical degrees and their faux concern "for the children" to frighten parents into keeping their kids unvaccinated.

And now we learn that the U.S. is in the midst of the worst whooping cough epidemic in 70 years. One of the most hard-hit states is Washington, which the CDC just announced (on 20 July) has suffered 2,520 cases so far this year, a 1300% increase over last year. This is the highest number of cases reported in Washington since 1942. This plot of the number of cases this year compared to last year shows the dramatic rise in infections:

The figure above shows the number of confirmed and probable pertussis cases reported, by week of onset in Washington, during January 1, 2011-June 16, 2012. Source: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Making things worse, it seems, is an increase in cases among children aged 13-14.Children get a booster shot at age 11-12, but the new outbreak indicates that the effectiveness of the booster may not last very long.The dramatic increase in whooping cough this year also suggests that the bacterium that causes it, Bordetella pertussis, is mutating to make the vaccine less effective.Nevertheless, the CDC emphasizes:

"Vaccination continues to be the single most effective strategy to reduce morbidity and mortality caused by pertussis. Vaccination of pregnant women and contacts of infants is recommended to protect infants too young to be vaccinated."

This good advice is seriously undermined when misinformed doctors such as "Dr. Bob" Sears directly advise pregnant women not to get the whooping cough vaccine, as he did in the Huffington Post. (Hint: it's a good rule to be very skeptical of celebrity doctors who go by their first name.)

I should also point out that whooping cough is a national problem, not just Washington State's. The U.S. has had over 17,000 cases this year, putting it on track for the worst year since 1959. Thehighest rate of infection in the nation is in Wisconsin (which has also been hit hard by anti-vaccine effects), followed by Washington and Montana.10 deaths have been reported, mostly in infants who were too young to be vaccinated. For all this, we can thank the anti-vaccination movement.

70 comments:

Why should we trust the same group of doctors and "experts" that don't care to tell us about aspartame, a known carcInogen, in all light products.... and mercury, the most toxIc non-radIoactIve substance on the Planet, of all thIngs,in our TOOTH fIllIngs.....and fluoride the IndustrIal wasteproduct and maIn IngredIent In rat poison, which is added to our water and toothpaste...? Why the heck should I listen to you?

Well, perhaps because you are probably going to know soemone who's child had whooping cough before you encounter anyone in your life impacted by any of those other evils which you are willing to believe in?

A little home science might involve finding out who in your circle of connections are afflicted with any of these.

Ignorance is perhaps the biggest threat to survival of humanity. You, Chilli, exemplifies this. Please keep your ignorance to yourself but most importantly before you pose a threat to yourself and others, engage in some serious research in reputable medical sources!

Hahahaha!!! Serious? Reputable? The FDA blocked the cure of cancer because they cannot patent it. The scientists that opened up the truth behind a lot of pill substances were fired, and order made from the government. Who is the ignorant one, buddy?

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is the worst for this - It's used as an industrial solvent for gods sake, and yet it's routinely sprayed over crops - no amount of washing'll get that out. Worse still, it's routinely found in our drinking supplies. It's been linked to well over 70% of cancer patients in the last 10 years - this is definitely not a coincidence! Worse still, the Big Homeopathy companies are routinely distributing it within their products! It's not just big pharma that's the problem - it's also big homo!

Chili with all due respect I don't know what alarmist propaganda conspiracy pieces you've been reading but if you did some real research you'd know those things mentioned can't actually hurt in trace amounts.

Fluoride may be poisonous yes, but at the levels in the water supply we're talking it's harmless. You know what other deadly toxin we use a small amount of in water? Chlorine.

You know what else is deadly to us in large concentrations? Oxygen, try living without it. Hell, table salt is a structure made of sodium and chlorine two very deadly chemicals in large concentrations.

The point is, pretty much anything in excess will kill us and anything diluted or in trace amounts is either harmless or beneficial. Checmicals are more complicated then a straight "This will kill you" "This wont kill you".

@Anonymous - Your humour is subtle, but I expect those living in fear of EVERYTHING will take it seriously. Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) = 2 hydrogen atoms (dihydrogen) bonded to one oxygen atom (monoxide), equals water (H2O). Note that water, taken in excess, will also kill you in a matter of hours.

Wait. Mercury is the most toxic non-radioactive substance on the planet? You mean, more toxic than botulinum toxin? Or belladonna? Your genius astounds me. Please, teach me this new "science-y" goodness to which you subscribe.

You are paranoid, so you won't really listen to anybody (anybody who is intelligent anyway). Keep being paranoid; no one will change your mind. I'm more interested in people who are willing to listen to reason.

You say a little bit of everything is a good thing. Well why not a little bit of whooping cough? A little bit of measles? Not that high of a percentage of people die out of thousands of people who contract it yet its LETS VACCINATE EVERYONE!!! LEAVE NOBODY OUT!!!! Talk about scaremongering. Its usually immune deficient people who die of these viruses. ie the people willing to consume the flouride...the mercury... the parabens...the phthalates...the gmo's... the petrochemicals... the sodium lauryl sulfate....the formaldehyde...the propylene glycol the list...goes...on. All these things added together which enter the bloodstream everyday of your lives for years on end cause serious problems ie cancer, thyroid problems, obesity and neurological disorders. How about instead of relying on your vaccinations, deal with the junk you're putting into your body. Make sure your immune system is strong enough to overcome one of these viruses if you catch it.

Er, sodium fluoride (in toothpaste) is not used in rat poison. This is an urban legend, see Snopes.com for more. Warfarin, though, is both an effective (human) drug and an ingredient in rat poison. It all depends on the dose.

Warfarin thins the blood, which is helpful for heart patients in the correct dose. Rats overdose on it, and since they cannot vomit when they start to feel ill, they die when their blood becomes too thinned. Hey, drinking too much water can kill you too, but nobody's suggesting you never drink water.

I don't understand why so many pro-vaccine people get so uptight (not to mention belligerent)about people who choose not to vaccinate or who modify/delay the schedule. If you got the vaccine, then what the hell are you so worried about - shouldn't you be protected?...hmmm?... Until the companies making the vaccines stop profiting from their distribution and we get some government officials that aren't in bed with the pharma companies I think it's wise for parents to question and push back on the ridiculous schedule of vaccinations being forced on the developing immune systems of our children. Especially given the amount of testing that's been done on these vaccines within the age groups to which they're administered - little to none - and yet the schedule of vaccinations grows every year despite any concrete proof that they're safe for our little ones. I think what's more of a threat to the health of Americans than a <90% vaccination rate is the level of obesity in adults and children and the amount of disease, chronic illness and immune system suppression that causes. If Americans weren't so fat and unhealthy it'd be a hell of a lot harder for them to get sick. The drug companies can't make any money on forcing people to stop consuming more calories than they burn off though, nor can they make money on advocating a healthy diet and regular exercise so, not going to happen anytime soon, especially since most people clearly appear to have zero interest in maintaining any kind of proactive approach to healthcare.

Haha as much as you want to believe pharmaceutical companies don't reep in their revenue with sales from vaccines. Sure most people feel they are almost forced to get a vaccine, but they do so only a few times in their life. The big money maker for pharmaceutical companies is the drugs that people buy on a regular basis. Such as aspirin and also the drugs people are dependant on such as blood pressure medication.

I'm not even in the same damned country and I get 'uptight' with the anti-vac'ers. Whether or not I'm in any danger from a disease does NOT mean I shouldn't worry for people who are. That kind of selfish thinking is only bound to do more harm in the long run.

Drug companies, from what I've heard, make very little on the vaccinations, certainly far, far less than they could on medication for the diseases.

The reason people who recognize that vaccination provides a valid means of protection against disease get very angry at anti-vaccination people is mostly due to the herd immunity concept referenced in the above article.

Vaccination, and the resultant herd immunity, is the only means by which humanity has completely eradicated a disease. Treatment of infected people simply results in an evolving disease organism, over the long haul. So yeah, it makes us mad.

The fact the ones that don't get vaccinated get sick and risk serious illnessess is plenty of reason to get vaccinations done. If you care about your children you would want them to be protected against diseases that can kill them.

As for why it annoys me. One you're being an arrogant prat thinking you know anything about the human immune system or even how vaccines work. You are not a doctor or micro biologist, I'm inclined to think they know more about this topic then you and we know what they endorse and I find it diffuclt to believe they're all in "Big Pharm's" pocket or whatever nonsense you think you know.

Two, you're putting your children at risk by your own ignorant attempts to "protect" them. Bordering on child endangerment really.

Three, viruses that are allowed to get a stranglehold in a body mutate. The more this occurs the more chance of it mutating into a strain resistant against the vaccine. So you're putting the rest of us at risk too.

Why am I concerned? Sure, I'm a lot less likely to get sick, but most vaccines only work at about 90% success. There's a ten percent chance it won't prevent any given person, and that includes me, from getting sick. The specific values vary a lot between vaccines, but none are perfect. But because so few people fail to get them, they work. Adding another 10% of the population that doesn't vaccinate doubles the number of susceptible individuals, and much more than doubles the rate of transmission, because the disease hits many fewer dead ends.

Read the book. If you are vaccinated and live in an unvaccinated population, you are more likely to contract the disease than if you are unvaccinated and live in a vaccinated population. This is why it is NOT a personal decision. We had a whole congregation who did not vaccinate, an epidemic went through the parish and then spiraled into the population beyond.

Vaccinations don't work b/c medical science can't predict what the pathogen will do. Just like anti-biotics. Our reliance on this to "save" ourselves is a race with minor gains but an eventual outcome that we just can't catch up to get to the finish line first. Prior to the vaccine, mankind as a species has survived for quite some time w/o its assistance. You want to keep from getting sick....a good nights rest, hydrate, eat nutrient dense food (not processed empty junk), exercise(for me a daily walk) and take the time to breath deeply. The human body is more than capable to protect itself without any additional injections or pills.

As a whole congregation, if you are going to push that idea, would fair better maintaining a healthy lifestyle than forcing people into a herd immunity. But I wouldn't force someone to adopt what I practice.

@ Mr Crampton: Do you understand what happens when a vaccination is administered? Do you understand how the human immune system works to combat infections, diseases, and other foreign infiltrations to the body? If you do not know, and choose to believe what you believe on faith, then leave your ignorance to yourself. Or better yet, ask someone you trust who does know.

As for mankind as a species, it is true that we have survived for a long time without the use of vaccination. However, before vaccinations, it was more likely that a person would become infected as well as succumb to the pathogen. You, nor I, cannot speak from personal experience on the matter because we did not have brothers and or sisters lost due to infectious deseases in pre-vaccination times, where people were left to prayer as a treatment.

As for your argument that living in an unhealthy lifestyle is more deadly than not being vaccinated, that is false. You may have been born with a supremely strong immune system, but the rest of the world may not be so lucky. If you look at the reasons why unhealthy people might die, it would usually be heart disease, which is one of the nations biggest killers, next to cancer. And if you haven't noticed, people live longer nowadays despite living drastically more unhealthy lifestyles. The art of medicine works because the men and women who devote their lives to its study look directly at how these pathogens affect the human body and can diagnose what disease has infected a person by looking at the infected person's symptoms. How can you even say that medial science can't predict what the pathogen will do?

To be healthy you need sleep, water, nutrients, and exercise. To survive an infection you need anti-bodies which is what vaccinations help to produce in a person's immune system.

Why do I care that you choose not to vaccinate? Because I care about more than just myself. Yes, I am vaccinated, as are my children. So I'm 90% sure that we will be safe from VPD's (not 100% because I recognise that vaccines only ' work' for 90% of those who get them). It is the babies who are at risk by your vax status that I fight for. And the cancer patients. And the elderly. That is why I care. As for pharmaceutical companies making money from the product they produce, you know who else makes money? Food companies. Maybe you should stop eating too, until they produce their product for free!

Also, infants cannot get many vaccines before one year because they would not have the proper immune response to make the vaccine effective... I don't want my baby to ge whooping cough from your unvaccinated kid.

@BCordle - I am not a person of religion nor bring that to this post, so you can put that card down.

Do you now what they put in a vaccine? It's listed on the CDC website. There are various opinions on the effects of those ingredients.

How are they measuring the minimum allowed dose of each of these additives? By adult, by kid, by infant. By their weight or immune response? By their genetics? And then the CDC has an immunization schedule. According to that schedule if a parent is vigilant in their infant's immunization, the infant would have 27 shots by 15 months time. The additives might vary a little per vaccine. Do you think these additives are starting to add up? Some believe so. It be nice to have that investigated. A baby's immune system, on average, takes 15 months - 2 years to mature. How far a long is an infants liver and kidneys? Do you think they can handle that amount of additives in 15 months? Again, it'd be nice if this was investigated.

@BCordle - I have noticed that 'more' people are living longer. Medical science seems to have made gains in giving everyone more quantity of life, but I would argue that quality of life has suffered considerably. I'm in my early thirties. I have friends around their late thirties, early forties that are dealing with issues you thought wouldn't happen till they were as old as their grandparents. Yaay to longer living.

And I would still disagree with you about medical science predicting what a pathogen will do. Anti-biotics is the best example I can initially think of. Multi-resistant bacteria?

Diet I believe is a major contributor to poor immune response. I have a friend that regressed her rheumatoid arthritis solely by changing her diet. When originally diagnosed, she rejected the doctor's drug recommendations and sought an alternative treatment. I myself have found benefits to my health and ability to fight infection since paying more attention to my food choices. I wouldn't consider myself a dramatic case like my friend but I haven't had a cold for 2 years. I would routinely expect 2 or 3 a year. My allergies to my mom and sister's dogs don't surface unless my sleep suffers.

I know there are more contributing factors, but you'd be surprised how much your constitution benefits by changing what you eat.

All of these answers are good ones. I personally had my kids vaccinated and a family who chose not to allowed their children to get chicken pox on purpose. Chicken pox has a long incubation period, and people stay contagious for a long time after the initial outbreak. So, after purposefully exposing her kids, the mom proceeded to bring them to large group school functions, sleepovers, etc. Her kids infected other kids at sleepovers and school, even those who had been vaccinated. The illness wasn't severe, but many kids who had been vaccinated still missed at least a week of school and events. On top of all of the above excellent reasons, it's just rude. People who choose not to vaccinate often also do not take their children to normal doctors (MDs), and they received incorrect information, returning their kids to school and the public when they are still contagious. Infants, elderly, and the immune compromised can die from exposure even if they have been vaccinated previously. Not to mention healthcare costs for those children who do come down with these diseases......

And, since the chicken pox virus remains in the body for life, she has inflicted its other manifestation of shingles - an excruciatingly painful disease that frequently occurs in later life among those who have chicken pox as children - on many of those she infected not to mention deaths which, although infrequent from chicken pox, can and do occur. Whooping cough is even riskier. Surely anyone who sees an infant suffering with it would have to acknowledge that the slight risk of vaccination outweighs the horror of the disease.

"The anti-vaxxers have convinced a frighteningly high number of parents in Washington State to withhold vaccines from their children."

"...the new outbreak indicates that the effectiveness of the booster may not last very long. The dramatic increase in whooping cough this year also suggests that the bacterium that causes it, Bordetella pertussis, is mutating to make the vaccine less effective."

Uh, so which is it? Anti-vaxxers is your starting argument, but then you seem to breeze by the idea that the booster may not last long enough, AND the bacterium is mutating. WTF is you argument?

When the vaccination rate drops below 90%, we lose the 'herd immunity' to the disease - i.e. it's able to spread, rather than being in isolated cases.

If the disease is able to spread like this, it:a) Has more time to mutate, to grow accustomed to the vaccination, which makes the vaccination then less effective in combatting itandb) Allows the disease to spread to those that have not been vaccinated, or those few that the vaccination or booster did not take fully to. Normally these would be low enough that the herd immunity of everyone else would mean they'd never be exposed to the disease, but the anti-vaxxers put these people in harms way.

Straight from the CDC MMR report:"Estimated DTaP coverage in Washington among children aged 19–35 months was 93.2% for ≥3 doses"and"However, because in most of the cases the patients were vaccinated, the 4.5% of Washington school children who were exempted from vaccination during 2011–2012 represented only a small proportion of those at risk for pertussis in the state."

BUT

"Although vaccinated children can develop pertussis, they are less infectious, have milder symptoms and shorter illness duration, and are at reduced risk for severe outcomes, including hospitalization (8–10)."

I'm as pro-vaccination as they come, but the evidence does not seem to support your conclusion. A May 10th AP article ("Whooping cough epidemic declared in Wash. state") says that CDC spokeswoman Alison Patti "emphasized that pertussis isn't spreading because of an anti-vaccine movement." Indeed, this year's epidemic has hit fully-vaccinated teens and pre-teens particularly hard. These kids were the first cohort to receive DTaP exclusively (after the switch away from DTP). In my opinion, the current epidemic is less an indictment of the anti-vac crowd than it is an indication that old vaccination schedules developed in the DTP era don't provide the same protection when used with DTaP.

While that may well be true, the anti vaccine movement is likely still helping the disease spread to more people than nescessary, even if it's not the primary method of transportation. This is still something I'd consider an issue.

Unvaccinated children have at least an eightfold greater risk for pertussis than children fully vaccinated with DTaP (7). However, because in most of the cases the patients were vaccinated, the 4.5% of Washington school children who were exempted from vaccination during 2011–2012 represented only a small proportion of those at risk for pertussis in the state."

BUT

"Although vaccinated children can develop pertussis, they are less infectious, have milder symptoms and shorter illness duration, and are at reduced risk for severe outcomes, including hospitalization (8–10)."

People need to understand one thing about science, it is not a thing you can believe in. It's knowledge gained through experimentation, I challenge any sceptics to find one peer revued double blind paper that states that any vaccine can lead to autism or any other harm to a child ( with the one exception to children who are allergic to eggs as that's where these virus particles are grown) Most vaccines are made of attenuated viruses anyways and pose no threat at all .

Science is above "beliefs" there are just facts, and are true wheather one believes in them is irrelevant they are still true.

One problem with children not getting vaccinated is that normal interactions can turn deadly. Suppose a six year old child, who is unvaccinated and carrying whooping cough, comes over to your house for a play-date with you child. (remember there is an incubation period; before symptom present but the disease spreads) Your vaccinated child is likely safe from infection, but you have an infant who is too young to vaccinate. It is the infant who is at the greatest risk and likely to die. This is unfair to the unvaccinated children and the parents of the vaccinated (or too young to vaccinate).I've taught and cared for many children over the years and have never thought to ask if any Children have had their shots before letting them near a baby. These latest findings give me pause.

Penn and Teller made the best case for vaccinating your children. If you can't believe two men who do thorough research on the pharmacies/have the facts and instead have to believe some discredited quack who doesn't know how to follow the scientific method properly. Well, maybe you don't deserve to raise children.

I mean, do you seriously want to see a return to the days where parents have to live in fear of their children dying from polio? From Cholera? Where measles, mumps and rubella can cause major, major problems in a large population? Vaccines save lives - all the arguments against them are, at best, spurious. All the scientific data suggests, very very strongly, that they do not have side effects anywhere near as bad as the anti-vac'ers would have you believe, that they help to save lives in the long run and that they're the best hope we have to stamping out these diseases.

Scientists aren't in on some masterfully crafted conspiracy, they don't all take orders from 'big pharma' (honestly, when someone uses that phrase, it makes me think that they probably have reactionary and poorly researched opionions, much like the use of the word 'sheeple' - that they think they're somehow better than everyone else, and that they're hipster-styling in the form of 'I disagree with the mainstream, man.'. The use of either phrase will likely make me roll my eyes and think 'Oh, here we go...' rather than 'what a revolutionary free thinker!'). What they DO do, however, is read papers that people have put out. And then they bury them in a barrage of questions. 'Why have you done this?' 'Can you prove that?' 'How does this follow from that?' ... they don't blindly accept things.

By all means, question things - I heartily encourage it - but PLEASE look at the evidence when you do so. To do otherwise is madness.

Clean water and better living conditions are the ONLY things which have advanced our health? What, so you don't think the discovery of drugs like penicillin which in its day would completely cure many previously fatal bacterial infections had anything to do with it also?

Penicillin and antibiotics are comic crackpot medicine are they? I think we all know who the comic crackpot is.....

It's interesting isn't it , how many statistics they have for the period of time BEFORE Europeans arrived there. ? Did the Native Americans all get together and do a census ? That's a pretty strong statement to make really.

No. A non-vaccinated person living in a vaccinated population (90% or more, from my understanding) is significantly less likely to become infected than a vaccinated person living in a non-vaccinated population. Vaccinations only work at stomping out disease-producing bacteria and viruses when EVERYONE has the vaccinations. The more people that are left without vaccination, the more opportunity for the bacteria or virus to mutate as it spreads, thus reducing the effectiveness of the vaccine.

In this way, non-vaccinated children are, indeed, a concern to the parents of vaccinated children. Vaccination is a responsibility everyone has to keep our society alive. End of story.

Then I hope you enjoy the 37ish years you will have on this planet because that's the average age most humans lived untill without the kool aid that is vaccinations, one of the single largest contributions to human life we have ever made.

Immunization HELPS a person combat an infection, it doesn't mean that he/she will never get it. We're talking about biology. It is a science that is so complicated that 20 years of practice can go by and it will still take you by surprise. Since you are stating that your immune system has had "220,000 yrs of practice", I surmise that you believe in evolution and that that is why you feel that the medical koolaide is useless to you. I would argue that you are missing the point. If in fact we have evolved to where our immune system can combat any infectious disease, great! We wont die from typhoid, cholera, influenza, or any other infectious agent. However, evolution applies to every living organism on the planet correct? That means that these diseases caused by viruses, or bacterium would also have 220,000 yrs of practice attacking our immune system. Therefore, we are on a level playing field. Oh wait, we have vaccines, which allow our immune system to have a vastly greater chance at fighting off these infections.

Please, just question everything. Question everything I have just said, then maybe that will give you the motivation to look up and study the truth behind all these claims. When I say that, I mean the real truth. Don't look for more news articles. Journalists don't know biology as well as biologists. Go to the source. Good luck with your life.

I think the evidence that the vaccine against pertussis prevents the disease transmission is not there. Even CDC admits that vaccinated kids can serve as reservoir of pertussis. What has been confirmed is that it a) prevents clinical disease and b) causes non-specific symptoms in vaccinated persons.

"..but the new outbreak indicates that the effectiveness of the booster may not last very long. The dramatic increase in whooping cough this year also suggests that the bacterium that causes it, Bordetella pertussis, is mutating to make the vaccine less effective. "

hmm... perhaps this epidemic might have something to do with the well known phenomenon of mutating bacteria. Perhaps the blaming the people who have chosen not to vaccinate is someone trying to find a scapegoat. Gotta keep those pharmaceuticals pumpin.

Because it has to be one or other, and couldn't possibly exist in the space between?

I'd say it's almost certainly more towards the 'ignorant people don't vaccinate' (yes, I went there) end of the spectrum though, especially since part of that mutation would have been facilitated by this.

Augmenting the problem is the fact that active infections are producing, and then selecting, for the spontaneous mutant bacteria that work around the vaccination best. My hunch is that when new strains are sequenced they will feature mutations that have been permitted to become installed during culture in the petri dish known as the unvaccinated public. These genetic workarounds will not evade all immune surveillance by current vaccines.

Did any of you know that the babies who died were exposed to people who had recently been vaxed and were shedding the virus that made those babies sick? My personal pediatrician, a very mainstream doc, admitted that his healthiest patients are the unvaxed ones.... As for assuming that unvaxed families are ignorant, I have spent hundreds of hours of study about the.pros and cons before I chose what.was best for.my children... not just follow blindly and do what i was told... Ignorance runs both ways...

From the research of vaccination for All Ages” is not just about childhood vaccinations. It shines a light on the 25 most common misconceptions about vaccines and addresses problems with vaccines in all age groups.